Colchicine for acute gout

医学 秋水仙碱 痛风 随机对照试验 荟萃分析 内科学 物理疗法 安慰剂 不利影响 重症监护医学 替代医学 病理
作者
Bayden J McKenzie,Mihir D. Wechalekar,Renea V Johnston,Naomi Schlesinger,Rachelle Buchbinder
出处
期刊:The Cochrane library [Elsevier]
卷期号:2021 (8) 被引量:28
标识
DOI:10.1002/14651858.cd006190.pub3
摘要

This is an updated Cochrane Review, first published in 2006 and updated in 2014. Gout is one of the most common rheumatic diseases worldwide. Despite the use of colchicine as one of the first-line therapies for the treatment of acute gout, evidence for its benefits and harms is relatively limited.To update the available evidence of the benefits and harms of colchicine for the treatment of acute gout.We updated the search of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Clinicaltrials.gov and WHO ICTRP registries to 28 August 2020. We did not impose any date or language restrictions in the search.We considered published randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomised controlled trials (quasi-RCTs) evaluating colchicine therapy compared with another therapy (placebo or active) in acute gout; low-dose colchicine at clinically relevant doses compared with placebo was the primary comparison. The major outcomes were pain, participant global assessment of treatment success (proportion with 50% or greater decrease in pain from baseline up to 32 to 36 hours), reduction of inflammation, function of target joint, serious adverse events, total adverse events and withdrawals due to adverse events.We used standard methodological procedures as expected by Cochrane in this review update.We included four trials (803 randomised participants), including two new trials, in this updated review. One three-arm trial compared high-dose colchicine (52 participants), low-dose colchicine (74 participants) and placebo (59 participants); one trial compared high-dose colchicine with placebo (43 participants); one trial compared low-dose colchicine with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (399 participants); and one trial compared low-dose colchicine with Chuanhu anti-gout mixture (traditional Chinese Medicine compound) (176 participants). We did not identify any trials comparing colchicine to glucocorticoids (by any route). The mean age of participants ranged from 51.2 to 70 years, and trial duration from 48 hours to 12 weeks. Two trials were at low risk of bias, one was possibly susceptible to selection bias (random sequence generation), reporting bias and other bias, and one open-label trial was at high risk of performance and detection bias. For the primary comparison, low-quality evidence from one trial (103 participants, downgraded for imprecision and bias) suggests low-dose colchicine may improve treatment outcome compared to placebo with little or no increased risk of adverse events. The number of people who reported treatment success (50% or greater pain reduction) at 32 to 36 hours was slightly larger with low-dose colchicine (418 per 1000) compared with placebo (172 per 1000; risk ratio (RR) 2.43, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.05 to 5.64; absolute improvement 25% more reported success (7% more to 42% more, the 95% CIs include both a clinically important and unimportant benefit); relative change of 143% more people reported treatment success (5% more to 464% more). The incidence of total adverse events was 364 per 1000 with low-dose colchicine compared with 276 per 1000 with placebo: RR 1.32, 95% CI 0.68 to 2.56; absolute difference 9% more events with low-dose colchicine (9% fewer to 43% more, the 95% CIs include both a clinically important effect and no effect); relative change of 32% more events (32% fewer to 156% more). No participants withdrew due to adverse events or reported any serious adverse events. Pain, inflammation and function were not reported. Low-quality evidence (downgraded for imprecision and bias) from two trials (124 participants) suggests that high-dose colchicine compared to placebo may improve symptoms, but with increased risk of harms. More participants reported treatment success at 32 to 36 hours with high-dose colchicine (518 per 1000) compared with placebo (240 per 1000): RR 2.16, 95% CI 1.28 to 3.65, absolute improvement 28% (8% more to 46% more); more also had reduced inflammation at this time point with high-dose colchicine (504 per 1000) compared with placebo (48 per 1000): RR 10.50, 95% CI 1.48 to 74.38; absolute improvement 45% greater (22% greater to 68% greater); but more adverse events were reported with high-dose colchicine (829 per 1000 compared with 260 per 1000): RR 3.21, 95% CI 2.01 to 5.11, absolute difference 57% (26% more to 74% more). Pain and function were not reported. Low-quality evidence from a single trial comparing high-dose to low-dose colchicine indicates there may be little or no difference in benefit in terms of treatment success at 32 to 36 hours but more adverse events associated with the higher dose. Similarly, low-quality evidence from a single trial indicates there may also be little or no benefit of low-dose colchicine over NSAIDs in terms of treatment success and pain reduction at seven days, with a similar number of adverse events reported at four weeks follow-up. Reduction of inflammation, function of target joint and withdrawals due to adverse events were not reported in either of these trials, and pain was not reported in the high-dose versus low-dose colchicine trial. We were unable to estimate the risk of serious adverse events for most comparisons as there were few events reported in the trials. One trial (399 participants) reported three serious adverse (one in a participant receiving low-dose colchicine and two in participants receiving NSAIDs), due to reasons unrelated to the trial (low-quality evidence downgraded for bias and imprecision).We found low-quality evidence that low-dose colchicine may be an effective treatment for acute gout when compared to placebo and low-quality evidence that its benefits may be similar to NSAIDs. We downgraded the evidence for bias and imprecision. While both high- and low-dose colchicine improve pain when compared to placebo, low-quality evidence suggests that high-dose (but not low-dose) colchicine may increase the number of adverse events compared to placebo, while low-quality evidence indicates that the number of adverse events may be similar with low-dose colchicine and NSAIDs. Further trials comparing colchicine to placebo or other treatment will likely have an important impact on our confidence in the effect estimates and may change the conclusions of this review. There are no trials reporting the effect of colchicine in populations with comorbidities or in comparison with other commonly used treatments, such as glucocorticoids.

科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI
科研通是完全免费的文献互助平台,具备全网最快的应助速度,最高的求助完成率。 对每一个文献求助,科研通都将尽心尽力,给求助人一个满意的交代。
实时播报
lhf完成签到,获得积分10
1秒前
1中蓝完成签到 ,获得积分10
2秒前
summer烨发布了新的文献求助30
2秒前
科研通AI2S应助大气早晨采纳,获得10
3秒前
3秒前
专注的书雁完成签到,获得积分10
4秒前
默茗发布了新的文献求助10
4秒前
科目三应助紧张的紫文采纳,获得10
5秒前
蜡笔小鑫发布了新的文献求助10
6秒前
df完成签到 ,获得积分10
9秒前
9秒前
9秒前
9秒前
耳喃发布了新的文献求助10
9秒前
默茗完成签到,获得积分10
10秒前
10秒前
Tomyyh完成签到,获得积分10
10秒前
研友_VZG7GZ应助xxx采纳,获得10
12秒前
12秒前
12秒前
苏杠杠应助大气早晨采纳,获得10
14秒前
内向的清炎完成签到,获得积分10
15秒前
冷傲凝琴发布了新的文献求助10
16秒前
愔愔应助zwj采纳,获得50
16秒前
爆米花应助蜡笔小鑫采纳,获得10
17秒前
愉快的牛氓完成签到 ,获得积分10
17秒前
17秒前
刘刘刘发布了新的文献求助10
17秒前
脑洞疼应助霡霂采纳,获得10
18秒前
脑洞疼应助耳喃采纳,获得10
20秒前
20秒前
淡竹结香完成签到,获得积分10
22秒前
24秒前
杜换青发布了新的文献求助10
25秒前
淡竹结香发布了新的文献求助30
26秒前
26秒前
深情安青应助大气早晨采纳,获得10
26秒前
2052669099应助还单身的寒云采纳,获得10
26秒前
28秒前
29秒前
高分求助中
(应助此贴封号)【重要!!请各用户(尤其是新用户)详细阅读】【科研通的精品贴汇总】 10000
AnnualResearch andConsultation Report of Panorama survey and Investment strategy onChinaIndustry 1000
卤化钙钛矿人工突触的研究 1000
Continuing Syntax 1000
Signals, Systems, and Signal Processing 610
简明药物化学习题答案 500
脑电大模型与情感脑机接口研究--郑伟龙 400
热门求助领域 (近24小时)
化学 材料科学 医学 生物 纳米技术 工程类 有机化学 化学工程 生物化学 计算机科学 物理 内科学 复合材料 催化作用 物理化学 光电子学 电极 细胞生物学 基因 无机化学
热门帖子
关注 科研通微信公众号,转发送积分 6275259
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 8095024
关于积分的说明 16922048
捐赠科研通 5345206
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 2841901
邀请新用户注册赠送积分活动 1819131
关于科研通互助平台的介绍 1676400